Friday, January 15, 2016

What do cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi, Smart Meters and other “smart” devices all have in common?

They emit radiation, which no one wants to take seriously as having
adverse health effects on humans. Medically, the adverse effects are
called “Non-thermal health effects.”

In 2013, a ninth grade experiment for a national science fair found
remarkable proof of radiation damage from Wi-Fi routers that was
replicated by a peer review study. Wow! So, what did both experiments
show? Garden cress seeds placed near Wi-Fi routers failed to germinate. Above are photographs that corroborate those findings.

Five
Danish schoolgirls proved what apparently no one in the microwave
industry wanted to. Wi-Fi radiation causes adverse effects to any life
forms, which, in their experiment, were garden cress seeds. The young
ladies placed the seeds near two Wi-Fi routers, waited and took
photographs for twelve days. The results—failure of seeds to
germinate—can be seen in the above photographs.

So, what does that experiment portend for humans? That similar effect(s) can occur from cell towers too. Two researchers, “Drs. Cammaerts and Johansson conducted a partial replication of the original Danish student study using
cell towers instead of WiFi routers as the source of wireless
radiation. They found that cress seeds located 200 meters from two cell
towers failed to germinate.” [1] What did they conclude from their findings? “Wireless technology may effectively and seriously impact nature and should urgently be used much more cautiously.”

That wireless technology may effectively and seriously impact nature and should be used much more cautiously
challenges why Wi-Fi routers are standard technology in USA schools;
why Smart Meters for electric, natural gas, and water utility companies
are mandated and retrofitted on to every dwelling; and why cell towers
[2], especially “stingrays” [3], litter the landscape like mushrooms
after a spring rain, while radiation-emitting computers and smart phones
are like appendages dangling from almost everyone’s personage. All
those technologies emit electromagnetic frequencies in various ranges
with adverse consequences for the environment, plant life (as we’ve seen
with the cress seeds), animals and humans.
Here are some studies that corroborate my last statement:

Man-made electromagnetic waves have actually largely been shown to have adverse effects on living organisms.
They affect, for instance,

mammals (Adang et al., 2006; Benlaidi & Kharroussi, 2011),

birds (Everaert & Bauwens, 2007),

amphibians (Balmori, 2006),

bees (Kimmel et al., 2007, Sharma & Kumar, 2010; Favre, 2011),

ants (Cammaerts et al., 2012, 2013),

fruit flies (Panagopoulos et al., 2004; Panagopoulos, 2012), and even

protozoa (Cammaerts et al., 2011).

In fact, they act firstly and essentially on the cellular membrane and so affect any living organism
(Cammaerts et al., 2011). Such waves have also been shown to impact
plants (Roux et al., 2008; Haggerty, 2010), at physiological and
ecological levels. [1] [CJF emphasis added}

Any microwave technology device that transmits and receives
information, signals, data, or voice messages emits EMFs / RFs known as
non-ionizing radiation that produce Non-thermal adverse health effects
recognized by the American Academy of Environmental Medicine here
and which vested microwave technology interests pooh-pooh. They claim
the only adverse health problem can be heated skin, and none of their
devices cause that. However, that ‘science’ is based on early radar
tests done in the 1950s and 1960s; it’s now 2016.

This chart shows the ranges of non-ionizing and ionizing radiation and their frequencies.

Now, I have a bridge on the moon I’d like to sell. Who wants to buy
it? No one, I’m certain, believes that’s a factual statement. Then, why
oh why, do consumers believe microwave technologies are not harmful? I
remember when cigarettes were smoked by doctors, and Camels was their favorite brand.

When will consumers get out from under the notion that if it’s on the
market, there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s been tested accurately for
safety, and we must have every updated version of the product?

Catherine J Frompovich (website)
is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in
Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular
Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published
in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine
authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers
and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare
professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years
and counting.